God does not exist.

[Eclipsing the Son]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

I believe it is invariably weakness because you try to appeal to an eternal authority as an end, rather than a means. As I said before, believing in the existence of God justifies coercive authority as something we must be subordinate to despite its practical uses.
And this, I'm actually willing to argue nicely with you, because this is in fact only my opinion.
But if we're talking about this now, I assume that you already understood the whole fight above was because they decided to scoff on logic only after their 'use' of it was proven false.

I'm aware that most of the above post is insubstantial rhetoric.

Your belief in what most believe in god for is cynical and mostly incorrect.

I also disagree with your stance on logic. I would say it is illogical to disbelieve instead of believe. Belief is productive and of positive influence. Time and time again history has proven that dissection and disbelief is self destructive and self absorbed. Such ideals based off of nihilism in the idea that strength is gained through self sufficiency over community and imagination tend to lead to personal and social implosion. Therefore I find it logical to believe in the unseen just as well as what is obviously apparent to the senses, including a belief in god.

Your logic is based of selfishness. Here is wisdom.

[Trolling the Trolls]

So iz EtS, Tere both Butt Buddies!!

__________________
I am the shadow on the moon at night
Filling your dreams to the brim with fright.

I made $hade Cry and I made Sanguine Mind leave

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

I also disagree with your stance on logic. I would say it is illogical to disbelieve instead of believe.

Do you go about thinking that there's a invisible hippopotamus behind your head that floats around and follows you but goes away as soon as something tries to observe it? It can't be disproven, therefore by your admission it is more logical to believe in it than not to. But then again, neither can you disprove it's actually a sentient fork, or a colony of bees, or all three.
Must we believe in all that?
Face it; it is impossible to believe and move to a state of disbelief by empirical evidence. We all depart from a state of disbelief and ignorance and move into a state of knowledge.
You weren't born thinking of both the theory of panspermia and abiogenesis as true and only after school did you discard them. No. You simply had never put a thought to it and evaluated it from a point of skepticism when these ideas were explained.

Therefore I find it logical to believe in the unseen just as well as what is obviously apparent to the senses, including a belief in god.

You find it reasonable, not logical.

[Eclipsing the Son]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Do you go about thinking that there's a invisible hippopotamus behind your head that floats around and follows you but goes away as soon as something tries to observe it? It can't be disproven, therefore by your admission it is more logical to believe in it than not to. But then again, neither can you disprove it's actually a sentient fork, or a colony of bees, or all three.
Must we believe in all that?
Face it; it is impossible to believe and move to a state of disbelief by empirical evidence. We all depart from a state of disbelief and ignorance and move into a state of knowledge.
You weren't born thinking of both the theory of panspermia and abiogenesis as true and only after school did you discard them. No. You simply had never put a thought to it and evaluated it from a point of skepticism when these ideas were explained.
.

That is why you think that belief in god should be abolished? Because you think the idea of a higher power that can be communicated with is in tangent with and has the benefit of invisible animals that we can't communicate with?

I considered myself atheist for 7 years. If you think I've never put any thought into the evaluation of the world around me or that I have never had a skeptics point of view then you are either mistaken or just trying to be insulting. I'd place my bet on the latter and point out that making claim at the lack of thoughts someone else has will probably fail because you can't prove what someone is thinking any more than I can prove the existence of god.

You are aware that Einstein believed in god, aren't you? That many a revolutionary also believed in god? You cannot think a person is stupid just because they believe in god and not point out your own wealth of ignorance.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

That is why you think that belief in god should be abolished? Because you think the idea of a higher power that can be communicated with is in tangent with and has the benefit of invisible animals that we can't communicate with?

No. I am merely explaining to you why a point of skepticism is the starting point for anything, which neutralizes the pseudo-logical saying of "absence of evidence is not evidence of abscence". Because for all intents and purposes, absence of evidence is indeed a perfectly valid evidence of absence.

The question of the existence of God, then, depends on our perspective of evidence, and that's the realm in which I become an atheist.

[Eclipsing the Son]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

No. I am merely explaining to you why a point of skepticism is the starting point for anything, which neutralizes the pseudo-logical saying of "absence of evidence is not evidence of abscence". Because for all intents and purposes, absence of evidence is indeed a perfectly valid evidence of absence.

The question of the existence of God, then, depends on our perspective of evidence, and that's the realm in which I become an atheist.

More rhetoric based off and stemming from rhetoric.

Good luck with your atheism. May it serve you as well as it did me.

[Serpent_Goth]

Originally Posted by Bat Attack

Discuss atheism and the statement “God does not exist”.

Why do people worship God? The answer cannot possibly be – for giving them life, as without life there would be no God. So why do people worship God?
Prayer is a waste of time. If it seems to work, coincidence is usually the answer.

Some quotes:
Stephen Roberts - I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours .
Epicurus - Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

I do believe in God , some people dont believe in God just because they dont see him...I dont have 2 see something to believe in it
Like I didnt see satan but I believe that he exicts
And maybe praying is a waste of time 4 u , but not for other people
Most of people feel in peace and safe when they pray
It depends on ur faith

[ÇâlegaDominú]

My god could kick your god's ass

[Necrophagist]

Your just not funny...

[ÇâlegaDominú]

I'm not so sure about that Necrophaggot, as even my entry to this forum appearently was quite a bang.

Oh, by the way:

'Your'

ha ha ha ha he he he

[Necrophagist]

' appearantly '

Ha ha ha hee hee hee ho ho ho!

[Drake Dun]

I don't think I have the energy to keep up with everything in this thread, even though there are at least half a dozen points of serious confusion, concerning e.g. how science and logic work, etc. I'm glad Jillian is picking up some of the slack. The truth is, I am just burned out on this stuff, mostly because I keep coming to the conclusion that people are deliberately lying to themselves. You can't really educated a person who is determined to remain blind.

Now, that accusation isn't directed at the believer types in this thread on every point of disagreement, or on the final conclusions or anything. But take, for example, this point that has got Jillian typing in 48 point font about burden of proof. The one I illustrated with the guy claiming he was Napolean reincarnated in my last post. There is simply no way you guys are actually failing to understand us on this point. I refuse to believe you are that stupid. If you were that fucking dumb, there is no way you could successfully start up a computer, log on to the Internet, and submit a post to a message forum. So when you pretend not to accept it, I can only conclude that you are lying. Or this business with saying that logic doesn't work, or science is a religion. Seriously. Some of this stuff falls straight into the "go fuck yourself" category. You don't believe it, so stop saying it.

I could go off on a tangent here about how perfect an illustration all of this is of the fact that magical thinking is dangerous even to reason and sense at their must foundational level - how people are sooner willing to say black is white and up is down than give up God, but... nah.

I did want to respond to the one person with whom I had direct correspondence. I'm too lazy to go find your post, but I read it yesterday, and the gist of it (do correct me if I'm wrong) is essentially that I'm casting my net too wide, making unjustified sweeping generalizations, and throwing the baby out with the bath water. This is a point worth discussing.

Here's the problem as I see it (I tried to hit on this in a previous post). I can, of course, make diplomacy decisions about when to say what to whom and in what tone of voice. And I should make better decisions, admitted. But as far as the actual meat of this matter goes - the ideas, reasoning, and so forth, I think we're at an impasse.

The basic problem is this: A lot of the stuff people believe doesn't bother me, and that goes in particular for the people in this forum, who seem to be a pretty amiable bunch. However, in order for me to feel comfortable with leaving unjustified beliefs unchallenged, I would have to accept a principle in some form or another that it's okay for people to believe things they can't back up. If I do that, how am I going to go after the bad beliefs?

It's not like I can say with a straight face, "It's okay to believe in a 'higher power' for no reason, but it's not okay to believe it wants you to stone your daughter - that would be extremist." The whole point of a belief is that it's something you think is true. If you actually believe the creator of the universe wants you to stone your daughter, it makes perfect sense to do so. Vague handwaving about "extremism" doesn't help anything. You can't tell the guy with the beard, "Sorry dude, I wanted to obey thy divine command, but it would have been extremist."

Making room for people to just make up any old shit they want and pretend it's true is opening the floodgates of insanity. So you tell me - is there some way out that I'm missing? Because I can't see it.

[Drake Dun]

And no, Einstein did not believe in God. The evidence could hardly be clearer.

I seriously need to stop reading these posts. The next person who claims that there is no evidence for the big bang, or that Hitler was on a mission to spread atheism around the world, or whatever is coming next, is going to get strangled. Really, people. READ something before you shoot off with this bullshit. When your recklessness with the truth reaches a certain level, it becomes tantamount to a lie.

[Eclipsing the Son]

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

And no, Einstein did not believe in God. The evidence could hardly be clearer.

I seriously need to stop reading these posts. The next person who claims that there is no evidence for the big bang, or that Hitler was on a mission to spread atheism around the world, or whatever is coming next, is going to get strangled. Really, people. READ something before you shoot off with this bullshit. When your recklessness with the truth reaches a certain level, it becomes tantamount to a lie.

"I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."- Albert Einstein

"God does not play dice" - Albert Einstein

Also. Nobody here claimed that Hitler was trying to spread atheism. Hitler also had a belief in god and scripture.

"Who will say that I do not act under direct providence of the God of all the universe" - Adolf Hitler

Maybe you should read more before jumping to conclusions. Starting with this thread.

[Drake Dun]

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

"I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."- Albert Einstein

"God does not play dice" - Albert Einstein

The man enjoyed metaphor. He also referred to gods, plural, and with the same rhetorical purpose in mind. Hawking does the same thing. Sagan did the same thing. Beyond that, you can take a position on what he believed anywhere between and including deism and atheism, but he most certainly did not believe in YHWH. Check out the Einstein article on Wikipedia or google him or whatever. He explicitly described himself as an "agnostic", and repeatedly said very unflattering things about religion, like, "the word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses...". Sounds a bit like Jillian actually, lol.

It's actually a little annoying to see the one about dice keep coming up. What he was talking about there was the uncertainty principle. So unless you think that he was suggesting that an intelligent being personally directs every quantum event, it's really obvious that that one is metaphorical. And I suppose most people who bring that quote up are immune to the irony that Einstein was wrong on that point, lol.

Also. Nobody here claimed that Hitler was trying to spread atheism.

That's why I said "...or whatever is coming next." I'm just getting a head start. You go through these things enough times, and you start to learn what kind of bullshit is coming next.

[Eclipsing the Son]

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

The man enjoyed metaphor. He also referred to gods, plural, and with the same rhetorical purpose in mind. Hawking does the same thing. Sagan did the same thing. Beyond that, you can take a position on what he believed anywhere between and including deism and atheism, but he most certainly did not believe in YHWH. Check out the Einstein article on Wikipedia or google him or whatever. He explicitly described himself as an "agnostic", and repeatedly said very unflattering things about religion, like, "the word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses...". Sounds a bit like Jillian actually, lol.

Sounds to me like he believed in god, lol. We weren't discussing whether he was a Jew, lol.

We're discussing the existence of god, not the usefulness or rationality of religion, lol.

It's actually a little annoying to see the one about dice keep coming up. What he was talking about there was the uncertainty principle. So unless you think that he was suggesting that an intelligent being personally directs every quantum event, it's really obvious that that one is metaphorical. And I suppose most people who bring that quote up are immune to the irony that Einstein was wrong on that point, lol.



That's why I said "...or whatever is coming next." I'm just getting a head start. You go through these things enough times, and you start to learn what kind of bullshit is coming next.

He was talking about how he believed in an order to the universe over chaos and that the universe is a creation over the idea that it is some marvelous accident.

What makes you so dry about this conversation? Nobody is forcing you to participate.

[Eclipsing the Son]

Einstein also explained science as a seeking of God's knowledge. Science is usually described as this. not an effort to disprove God's existence, but to seek it out and prove it. It's rather amusing that so many atheists take science as a fallback for their beliefs only to find most scientists in disagreement with them.

Atheism is not the stance most scientists take. In a convention based around recent string theory beliefs, scientists concluded that one could trace back all events link back to a single event. When asked what happened before this event a spokesperson could be quoted as saying "Only God knows".

Atheism tends to be a belief held by unproductive nihilists that are simply unhappy with life over scientific individuals who seek to understand the world around us.

You can claim that these people see god only as a metaphor but anybody else including the scientists would probably state otherwise.

[MollyMac]

I never caught why science and a belief in god have to be mutually exclusive. Then again, I'm all DayQuilled up.


"I believe it is invariably weakness because you try to appeal to an eternal authority as an end, rather than a means. "

I believe it is weak to work under that assumption for all with a belief and not have an allowance for th eindividual and their spirituality. Deity is not an end, deity is a human supposition for the means.

Belief is god is a akin to a working belief in anarchy- they only work with faith, and so they will not work for you.

[JCC]

I've never seen any evidence for the existence of a god and I don't like the idea of the existence of a god and therefore I do not believe in the existence of a god. If there is a god there... shit.

[Eclipsing the Son]

People in the past who actually lived under oppressive governments used God to escape from oppression and dictate their own lives, finding personal happiness and freedom.

Now that the descendants of people with these beliefs are in charge, people who feel they are oppressed by the ones who believe in God try to take atheism as a point of rebellion. They rebel against people who give them infinitely more freedom over what a now extinct pagan dictatorship would have given you.

Would you rather go back to when a ruler would force to to worship him as God? I rather favor today's governments that allow the individual to believe whatever he wishes.

If you believe atheism is some kind of progress you are wrong. By atheism the most powerful person becomes god and we fall back into pagan ways of the past.

[Sir. Helpmann]

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

The man enjoyed (Einstein) metaphor. He also referred to gods, plural, and with the same rhetorical purpose in mind.

How on earth do you know? Care to cite any evidence to suggest this? Or are you telling us not to take Einstein's words "literally" like most Christians do regarding the Bible?

"You're taking it literally, what it it actually means is..."

Sounds rather similar don't you think? Just accept the fact that Einstein was a theist.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by MollyMac

I never caught why science and a belief in god have to be mutually exclusive.

Yep

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

Einstein also explained science as a seeking of God's knowledge. Science is usually described as this. not an effort to disprove God's existence, but to seek it out and prove it.

No. Science has nothing to do with proving or disproving God.

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

Atheism is not the stance most scientists take.

Agnostic and atheist are the stances that the majority I've met have taken.

[Necrophagist]

Isaac Newton,
Einstein,
Ibn Nafiz,
Copernicus,
Galileo...

They were all religious...

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Necrophagist

Isaac Newton,
Einstein,
Ibn Nafiz,
Copernicus,
Galileo...

They were all religious...

So? They were all theistic in an age where it wasn't allowed to not be a theist, with the exception of Einstein, who still would've been frowned upon, not that it matters anyway whether they were theists or not. Richard Dawkins is an atheist. Does quoting scientists who agree with you make your position infallible? No.

Anyway, what do you mean pagan dictatorships? Every religion has had its theocracy. Also, atheism doesn't make the most powerful person god. I'm an egalitarian and I'm an atheist.

[Eclipsing the Son]

Originally Posted by Raptor

Yep


No. Science has nothing to do with proving or disproving God.

On the contrary. I repeat what I have stated earlier. Most scientists believe in god.

You can research it.

Agnostic and atheist are the stances that the majority I've met have taken.

Again. The opposite has been the case with me. Every professor in science I met in college believed in god. You can research nearly every famous scientist and discover they believed in god and that there was an intelligent order to the universe.